Discussion The Cost of Kit vs Scratch Build: A Real Divide or Just Perspective?

[Dave Stevens (Lumberyard)]

if you want to get deep into it i can dig this up. i just let it sitting in my archives because kit builders would have no interest. This was done about 15 or so yeas ago

but not here wrong topic i would have to it in the school topic

 

[Dave Stevens (Lumberyard)]

Once those relatively few shapes are known, gotten out of the building stock, and assembled, everything else in the process of construction can be derived in the fitting of subsequent parts from the hull structure itself as the ship, or model, is being built.

hey Bob were a student of the later Robert Bruckshaw? that is exactly what he taught me, another point of wisdom from Robert was not only learn how to build the model but also how to take them apart. Odds are fitting everything the first time is slim. Robert called it relative design and scale.

 

[AllanKP69]

Same for me

Sorry guys. The PDF attached on Dave's post above is the one I was trying to link.
Allan

 

[Roger Pellett]

Drafting is a language. Learning it used to involve understanding certain accepted conventions including the standard views for different situations. Even if like me you were a terrible draftsman to become an engineer it was necessary to learn the language. As a result one could interpret drawings regardless of their spoken language.

It was a common requirement of pipe fabrication contracts to draw isometric drawings for different piping systems from the engineers’ orthographic drawings. These were not drawn to scale and “busy” areas were exaggerated to show detail. The drawings were used as an aid to field forces erecting the piping assemblies.

Years ago the company that I worked for decided to switch to CAD and we hired a couple of experienced CAD draftsmen to lead the transition. I gave one of these guys the job of preparing isometrics. The drawings that he prepared bore no resemblance to what I was looking for. He explained that this was a better 3-D projection than an isometric. I tried to explain that “better” did not meet requirements. It was necessary to produce a drawing that could be understood in the field. He remained unconvinced.

I wonder if the instructions for these model kits are using illustrations with some sort of weird 3-D projections.

Roger

 

[Bob Cleek]

Once those relatively few shapes are known, gotten out of the building stock, and assembled, everything else in the process of construction can be derived in the fitting of subsequent parts from the hull structure itself as the ship, or model, is being built.

hey Bob were a student of the later Robert Bruckshaw? that is exactly what he taught me, another point of wisdom from Robert was not only learn how to build the model but also how to take them apart. Odds are fitting everything the first time is slim. Robert called it relative design and scale.

Never heard of the guy. I did, however, over a period of many years, maintain a friendship and do a sort of informal apprenticeship with a master wooden boatbuilder who had done his formal apprenticeship as a boatbuilder at the Mare Island Naval Shipyard before the War when the Navy was still building and using a lot of wooden small craft as well as larger wooden vessels such as minesweepers and patrol boats. He later ran his own boatyard specializing in wooden yachts for many years here on San Francisco Bay. He was an "old school" tradesman whose skills were his stock in trade and he kept them close to his vest like they all did back then. I'm sure you are familiar with this convention, but younger people seem completely oblivious to it these days. YouTube is full of "how-to-do-its" that must have the old-time craftsmen spinning in their graves. The way they looked at it, if they taught somebody how to do it, that was one less job they'd be getting from there on out. I once saw a sign in a boatyard office that said, "Please don't ask us how to do it yourself for free. We're here to do it for you for our living."

I was one of a handful of young guys in my neck of the woods who had an interest in traditional wooden boat construction at a time when the rest of the world was discovering fiberglass hull construction. Good wooden yachts were a dime a dozen because everybody wanted a fiberglass boat, and it was possible for a young guy to afford a very nice used wooden boat if you were able to work on it yourself to limit maintenance costs. We'd haul our boats out at his boatyard, and he'd let us work on them ourselves. We quickly learned that if we kept our eyes open and our mouths shut, we could learn quite a bit from just watching the old guys working in the yard. After a while, he had a small litter of us, some of whom even ended up working for him and, later, for other yards as journeymen boatbuilders themselves. I ended up working parttime for a classic yacht brokerage and got to sail a lot of really great (and some famous) yachts. When my friend the boatbuilder retired, he decided to build a sharpie for himself. I was able to watch over his shoulder from lofting to launch, sometimes lending a hand when he needed one. Most of it he did alone. He gave me a running commentary which really complimented what I'd learned prior to that, which was not inconsiderable. There are many "tricks of the trade," some I knew, but many I didn't. And I was able to absorb the philosophy of it, or his version of that, at least.

Part of what I learned of lofting from him was that you only needed to loft what was necessary. A complete set of lines, let alone a complete set of construction drawings, may provide necessary detail from time to time, but there are many ways to develop the shapes besides drawing them and making patterns. A good example is beveling sawn frame faces. Certainly, one can develop the angles of those rolling bevels frame by frame and mark the stock to cut them. On a large vessel, you'll probably have a big ship's saw that can cut those rolling bevels if you have an experienced crew to call the angles and crank the saw to keep up with the feeder. On smaller vessels, however, it's a lot easier to set the frames up on the keel, secure them with ribbands, and dub their faces with a lipped adze, a drawknife, or a spokeshave, and for really small vessels, like models, you can fair the frame faces with a batten with sandpaper glued to the face of it and another batten to chalk-mark the high spots. There's really no point that I can see in trying to machine the bevels at even 1:48 scale, so why bother trying to develop and draw them when you can fair them in place. .

Most all of the published lines we will encounter today will have been well faired. I'm sure there are a few errors to be found in some of Chapelle's offset tables, but those will usually be so glaring that they are easy to spot and correct without returning to the drawing board at all. Given the small size of scale models, the "margins of error" are similarly "scaled down" which generally will be too fine a tolerance to notice or worry about.

Drafting, be it manual or CAD, (the difference being a matter of taste at this point, I suppose,) is just another of the skills one needs to acquire to build ship models from scratch. At the risk of bruising egos, I must say that, as far as I'm concerned, those who are serious about the hobby acquire such skills for exactly that reason. There are others who will say that they have no interest in drafting or lofting and they prefer to buy their plans for modeling readymade. There is certainly a market for them and no reason not buy them if one so desires, but, as with so much else, including, but not limited to, modernly, things like 3d printing, the more one buys and the less they do on their own, the less of their models they build themselves.

Roger Pellet is so right that "Drafting is a language." There's really nothing for it but to learn the language before you "pass go." Drafting seems to be a common stumbling block for a lot of ship modelers, as does nautical nomenclature. Frankly, I can't see how anybody could even begin to aspire to building ship models without having at least a basic mechanical drawing class under their belt, a set of instruments, and a reference manual or two. The same is true of nautical nomenclature. If one does not wish to learn the proper terms, a language unto itself, to be sure, then maybe they really should consider another hobby. I realize kits excuse many from acquiring the essential basic skills of model ship building, but those who avail themselves of such "frozen TV dinner" shortcuts deprive themselves and their models of what could have been a real home-cooked gourmet meal.

 

[Bob Cleek]

the topic is drifting away this is cost of kit vs scratch

but maybe the topic has run its course and nothing more to say

if you want to learn drafting and plans i can take it to the school for model ship building

i have a number of tutorials on the subject

It probably wouldn't hurt to move it to its own thread or incorporate it in the "School" thread. I run into so many people who are building ship models and some who have been for many years, and just have no clue how to read lines. I know it sounds totally foreign to them when I explain that once they wrap their head around it, they can look at a lines drawing and visualize exactly what the solid hull shape looks like, which is what the draftsman intended when he drew the drawing. Some basic drafting conventions and an explanation of how to loft a flat angled transom and use the section lines, half-breath lines, and shear plan in conjunction to determine three dimensional shapes from two dimensional drawings would be helpful for many, I'm sure.

 

[dockattner]

Drafting seems to be a common stumbling block for a lot of ship modelers, as does nautical nomenclature. Frankly, I can't see how anybody could even begin to aspire to building ship models without having at least a basic mechanical drawing class under their belt, a set of instruments, and a reference manual or two. The same is true of nautical nomenclature. If one does not wish to learn the proper terms, a language unto itself, to be sure, then maybe they really should consider another hobby. I realize kits excuse many from acquiring the essential basic skills of model ship building, but those who avail themselves of such "frozen TV dinner" shortcuts deprive themselves and their models of what could have been a real home-cooked gourmet meal.

And this, dear friends, is where the accusations of elitism find their origin...

 

[Roger Pellett]

I’m sorry guys but I don’t understand this elitism business. Almost every human endeavor has its own language or if you prefer “lingo”. You can either watch a sport on TV as my wife does without understanding the rules of the game or the terms that the announcers use or like sports fans you can learn enough to analyze what’s happening. Both enjoy watching. No one criticizes the sports fans for being elite.

Likewise you can buy highly engineered kits and enjoy assembling them into models for your personal enjoyment. If you enjoy doing this that’s fine. No one’s criticizing you. You may, however, become frustrated if you don’t understand the way that the spatial relationships involved are described by the kit manufacturer’s instructions. Is that because of a poor job by the kit’ instructions or is it because you lack the expertise to build the kit?

On the other hand, you can immerse yourself in the engineering and design involved in building the real vessel and construct a model from scratch. There’s nothing elite about this. Unlike a sports team, no one’s going to “cut” you. In fact you’ll find lots of support from other scratch builders.

Roger

 

[Jimsky]

If you enjoy doing this that’s fine. No one’s criticizing you.

Really? Since when did that change? On a couple of forums, we keep hearing, often from a vocal few, that model shipbuilding isn’t for everyone, that building from kits somehow spoils the hobby, and that only scratch building is the "real" way to go.
Lately, someone even came across the idea that members shouldn’t start building at all unless they already have a basic mechanical drawing class under their belt, and know nautical terminology. Am I missing something here?
And again… why do we keep comparing this hobby to professional sports or a television show? That feels like comparing apples to oranges. This is supposed to be an enjoyable, creative pursuit for everyone, not a qualifying round for the Olympics. Ouch...

 

[Daniel20]

If one does not wish to learn the proper terms, a language unto itself, to be sure, then maybe they really should consider another hobby.

Hi Bob, I could easily interpret your quoted statement above as an elitist statement however I choose not to think of you in that light. I prefer to think of your statement as one might be happier or less prone to frustration if they learned more about the model's subject matter. At least that's what I hope you meant.

 

[Roger Pellett]

Daniel,
I won’t speak for my friend Bob but that’s exactly what I’m trying to say.

Roger

 

[Bob Cleek]

Bob Cleek said:

Drafting seems to be a common stumbling block for a lot of ship modelers, as does nautical nomenclature. Frankly, I can't see how anybody could even begin to aspire to building ship models without having at least a basic mechanical drawing class under their belt, a set of instruments, and a reference manual or two. The same is true of nautical nomenclature. If one does not wish to learn the proper terms, a language unto itself, to be sure, then maybe they really should consider another hobby. I realize kits excuse many from acquiring the essential basic skills of model ship building, but those who avail themselves of such "frozen TV dinner" shortcuts deprive themselves and their models of what could have been a real home-cooked gourmet meal.

And this, dear friends, is where the accusations of elitism find their origin...

You're quite possibly correct. Have you ever noticed that those who accuse others for being "elite" are always those who aren't? I can certainly see how those who would avail themselves of short cuts might well be the same sort who would take umbrage at anyone mentioning that they do. Not that it really matters any. Their accusations are invalid, though, because the observation is indisputably true: "I realize kits excuse many from acquiring the essential basic skills of model ship building, but those who avail themselves of such "frozen TV dinner" shortcuts deprive themselves and their models of what could have been a real home-cooked gourmet meal." Most "confirmed" kit builders will readily explain that they prefer to build kits because they do not have the time and/or interest in learning and/or doing things like drafting, lofting, nautical nomenclature, historical research, scale stock milling, and on and on and on. Obviously, although there are many quantitative and qualitative variables, generally speaking, a kit model in significant proportion reflects the work of others purchased in completed form by the builder, while a scratch-built model is solely a product of its builder's own efforts. The analogy with food is accurate: One cook makes their own fresh pasta using imported flour and their tomato sauce from scratch using extra virgin olive oil, fresh tomatoes, herbs, and garlic. The other buys dried pasta and Hunt's canned tomato sauce. If someone wants to criticize the chef who cooks from scratch as being "elitist," they can go right ahead, but which cook's pasta one prefers to eat is purely a matter of taste.

 

[Dave Stevens (Lumberyard)]

I’m sorry guys but I don’t understand this elitism business.

nor do i

maybe because it is the use of "vs" which implies one against the other which it is not. it is a continuum from beginner to master in any endeavor

 

[Jimsky]

Bob Cleek said:
Drafting seems to be a common stumbling block for a lot of ship modelers, as does nautical nomenclature. Frankly, I can't see how anybody could even begin to aspire to building ship models without having at least a basic mechanical drawing class under their belt, a set of instruments, and a reference manual or two. The same is true of nautical nomenclature. If one does not wish to learn the proper terms, a language unto itself, to be sure, then maybe they really should consider another hobby. I realize kits excuse many from acquiring the essential basic skills of model ship building, but those who avail themselves of such "frozen TV dinner" shortcuts deprive themselves and their models of what could have been a real home-cooked gourmet meal.



You're quite possibly correct. Have you ever noticed that those who accuse others for being "elite" are always those who aren't? I can certainly see how those who would avail themselves of short cuts might well be the same sort who would take umbrage at anyone mentioning that they do. Not that it really matters any. Their accusations are invalid, though, because the observation is indisputably true: "I realize kits excuse many from acquiring the essential basic skills of model ship building, but those who avail themselves of such "frozen TV dinner" shortcuts deprive themselves and their models of what could have been a real home-cooked gourmet meal." Most "confirmed" kit builders will readily explain that they prefer to build kits because they do not have the time and/or interest in learning and/or doing things like drafting, lofting, nautical nomenclature, historical research, scale stock milling, and on and on and on. Obviously, although there are many quantitative and qualitative variables, generally speaking, a kit model in significant proportion reflects the work of others purchased in completed form by the builder, while a scratch-built model is solely a product of its builder's own efforts. The analogy with food is accurate: One cook makes their own fresh pasta using imported flour and their tomato sauce from scratch using extra virgin olive oil, fresh tomatoes, herbs, and garlic. The other buys dried pasta and Hunt's canned tomato sauce. If someone wants to criticize the chef who cooks from scratch as being "elitist," they can go right ahead, but which cook's pasta one prefers to eat is purely a matter of taste.

Well, I’m glad you've found a metaphor that satisfies your palate, but let’s not confuse personal preference with universal truth. The implication that kit builders are somehow “microwaving” their way through the hobby while scratch builders are crafting culinary masterpieces is not only arrogant, it’s dismissive of the skill, care, and creativity many kit builders bring to their work.

You say most kit builders openly admit they aren’t interested in drafting or milling their own lumber — and possibly that’s true. But so what? What's wrong with that? Some people enjoy sailing ships; others enjoy building them. Not everyone dreams of growing the trees first.

I keep saying that this hobby has room for those who scratch-build from raw timber and those who open a kit box. It’s not a moral hierarchy — it’s a shared passion expressed in different ways. If someone wants to handcraft every bolt and beam, good on them. If someone wants to bring a kit to life with patience and pride, that’s just as valid, even if they don't know the nautical terminology.

It’s ironic to warn against accusations of elitism while writing a post that reads like a résumé for the Model Shipwright Supremacy League. At the end of the day, we're all just trying to build something beautiful. Maybe let people enjoy their "meal" — whether it came from the garden, the grocery store, or yes, even the frozen aisle.

 

[Jimsky]

I’m sorry guys but I don’t understand this elitism business.

Dave, this is for you.

Elitism, in this context, refers to the attitude or belief that one particular way of participating in the hobby, typically scratch building, is inherently superior to others, such as building from kits. It's the idea that unless you master certain "essential" skills (like drafting, milling your own stock, or using period-correct terminology), you're not a "real" model shipbuilder.

This kind of thinking often dismisses or diminishes the effort, creativity, and dedication of those who approach the hobby differently. It can come across as gatekeeping — drawing an imaginary line between the "serious" builders and the rest, as if enjoyment, craftsmanship, or learning only count when done a certain way.
,
At no way I am saying scratch building isn’t admirable or challenging — it absolutely is! But elitism appears when admiration turns into judgment or exclusion, whether intended or not.

 

[Daniel20]

But elitism appears when admiration turns into judgment or exclusion, whether intended or not.

Very well said Jim!

 

[Dave Stevens (Lumberyard)]

but let’s not confuse personal preference with universal truth

lets not be confused

would you consider yourself a woodworker that makes furniture if you buy it from IKEA?

would you call yourself and artist if you by a paint by number from hobby Lobby ?

would you call yourself a chef if you buy a frozen dinner?

can you call yourself a model shipwright if you assemble a kit?

This is the truth to master anything takes learning, skill and practice and no short cuts.

not to say what route you choose go with whatever suite you but don't make claims of being something your not or try to lessen those who accomplish higher standards.

 

[Dave Stevens (Lumberyard)]

This kind of thinking often dismisses or diminishes the effort, creativity, and dedication of those who approach the hobby differently

not at all it shows what can be accomplished if you are offended and think your being looked down on that is your personal problem.

if your statement were true i would be posting scratch built models with the statement HA HA look what i can do and you can't. BUT NO i started a school to teach and help builders to improve and learn. If you don't want to learn drop out of the school.

 

[Bob Cleek]

Hi Bob, I could easily interpret your quoted statement above as an elitist statement however I choose not to think of you in that light. I prefer to think of your statement as one might be happier or less prone to frustration if they learned more about the model's subject matter. At least that's what I hope you meant.

Well, to quote Horton the Elephant, "I said what I meant, and I meant what I said." Some years back, a fellow asked me a question regarding the rigging of a period warship. I don't remember what the question was. Probably something like, "What is a crossed cat harpin?" I suggested he refer to a copy of David Lees' Masting and Rigging of English Ships of War which I thought would certainly have a drawing of these. He dismissed the suggestion, complaining that Lees was "useless" because Lees used nothing but obscure nautical terms that he "had no interest in learning." All he wanted was an illustration to copy. The irony was that if he'd made the effort to develop some command of the nomenclature, over time he would have acquired a fluency that would have enabled him to know the answer to his question, together with many others.

My point was, simply, if you don't want to put out the effort to learn the language, what's the point of pursuing any interest in the literature? It's like saying, "I want to play the piano, but I have no interest in learning to read music. People who know the names of the notes are "elitists."

You are entirely correct about my intentions, which have always been to encourage modelers to take an ever-deeper dive into the subject matter for the sheer fascination and joy of it. I don't consider myself an exceptional modeler. I'm just old, I read, and I know stuff. One thing I know for certain about anything is that the more you know, the easier it gets and the better you can do it and the easier it gets and the better you can do anything, the more you enjoy it and the more rewarding it becomes. I've built my share of kits and I'm not knocking kits per se, but there is so much more to ship modeling than just assembling kits. Kits are great fun and can be a source of great satisfaction. All I'm trying to do is encourage people to keep on going further because, when you do, it keeps getting better. And if someone doesn't want to make that commitment, that's perfectly fine with me. If they have no ambition to go further into the subject than building kits and are satisfied, I say, "Good for you!" That's not elitist.

 

[Jimsky]

Let's not be confused

would you consider yourself a woodworker that makes furniture if you buy it from IKEA?

Most people who assemble IKEA furniture wouldn’t dream of calling themselves woodworkers. They understand there's a clear difference between assembling parts and designing, cutting, and building from raw wood. The distinction is clear and respected, without judgment.

would you call yourself and artist if you by a paint by number from hobby Lobby ?

Most people wouldn’t call themselves artists just for completing a paint-by-number. It is a creative activity, but it doesn’t involve original expression or vision.
On the flip side, someone did stick a banana to a wall with duct tape and called it art, and himself an artist (and sold it for $120,000!). That’s the absurd end of the spectrum, where intention, context, and the art world's quirks play a big role

can you call yourself a model shipwright if you assemble a kit?

Yes, you absolutely can. A model shipwright is someone who builds model ships, not just someone who mills their own lumber or drafts their own plans. Assembling a kit still requires precision, patience, and skill. Whether you build from a kit or from scratch, you’re shaping, fitting, painting, problem-solving, and bringing a miniature vessel to life.
If someone insists the title “shipwright” is reserved only for scratch builders, they’re missing the point — and honestly, trying a little too hard to protect a title that was never theirs to gatekeep.

This is the truth to master anything takes learning, skill and practice and no short cuts.

No one’s arguing against learning, skill, or practice — they’re essential in any craft. But the idea that kits are “shortcuts” ignores reality. Every model, kit, or scratch demands patience, problem-solving, and craftsmanship. A kit simply provides a different starting point, not an endpoint to learning.

Mastery doesn’t come from how raw your materials are. It comes from what you do with them!